Shark Bait

Knowledge Centers

Operating Systems

Networking & Internet

Mobile & Wireless

Security

Storage

Business Intelligence

Servers & Data Center

Computerworld Reports

Industry

See your link here

Seth Weintraub

Apple versus Google

Is Intel trying to squash Linux netbooks?

10 comments

TAGS:Arm, Intel, Linux, squash
IT TOPICS:Laptops & Netbooks, Linux, Windows & Microsoft

OK, that title might be a little misleading. Intel has a long history of supporting Linux and makes plenty of money selling hardware that Linux runs on.

But strangely today in my Intel Enterprise Scoop Twitter feed I got the following Twit:

Why would Intel want to promote the demise of Linux netbooks? The original Intel-powered EeePC ran a version of Xandros that was more than good enough to get the NetBook segment off of the ground.

Those little Eees flew off the shelves running Linux until Microsoft stepped in and sold Windows XP for $15/seat. That price point was good enough to get most netbook vendors to switch OS's to XP. Consumers seem to have agreed. The netbook category remains hot but now it is dominated by XP machines running on Intel Atom processors.

Perhaps the early adopter-types that were willing to try out the new netbook category devices were also the types willing to use Linux. As more mainstream 80%-ers started buying these devices, the Windows Staple probably became more appealing. At $15/seat, the cost of Windows XP isn't making a big mark on the total price of the device either.

But back to the original question: Why is Intel promoting the concept of Linux being dead on the netbook?

ARM.

The biggest (or should I say smallest) competitor that Intel has had since is ramping up for a Netbook rollout in the coming months. We've already seen some smaller ones running Google Android Linux that should hit the streets soon. Pegatron, an ASUS (of Eee fame) spinoff, is producing a very interesting device that promises to cost less than an Eee, somehow be smaller and at the same time use a fraction of the battery. Archos has their new Web devices running Linux on ARM in the pipeline as well.

All of these new products are running on Linux and are a threat to Intel's dominance of the netbook/MID space. All of them will cost much less than comparably equipped Intel products. All of them will also beat Intel on battery life and space requirements.

Will ARM chips perform as well as Atom chips? The verdict is still out. ARM does have some quad core designs for 2010 that seem like they'll be able to run with the best Intel has to offer. ARM's Cortex A8 seems to run browsers at comparable speeds to Intel's upcoming Moorestown Atom processor. And at a fraction of the power requirements.

The one thing that these ARM devices can't do? They don't do Windows. That is one area where you need Intel (or AMD/VIA x86).

Being needed is a good thing for anyone, even Intel.

Update: Not sure what to make of this. Intel's InsideScoop Twitter is quoting this story. Is it a bot?

Email this

Digg this

What People Are Saying

Add new comment

sub-netbook with ARM: Nokia N800 and N810

Submitted by lad.koc on April 29, 2009 - 12:58 A.M.

There is an ARM-based Linux device (internet tablet) running Maemo (Debian) for several years now. With a community of users. The Nokias are "very underpowered netbooks", indeed. But I think that when discussing the mobile internet devices, as netbooks, one should also include the Internet Tablet from Nokia. With multitasking, switching between tasks, small screen - but still definitely positive acceptance. It can even be used for numerical calculations, I run octave on it. You can work with python programming on your Nokia, but above all, it is an Internet access device.

Reply | Report this comment

Intel's last ditch effort

Submitted by THK on April 28, 2009 - 2:23 P.M.

How I see it in a different light, Intel wants to continue its x86 line for few more years to fund more resources to the Itanium and the graphics component divisions.

Perhaps as an insurance, Intel might make a brand new RISC processor in the future. (reviving Alpha?)

The sudden popularity of ARM will not help Intel anyways.

Reply | Report this comment

Wintel

Submitted by Robert Pogson on April 28, 2009 - 1:15 P.M.

M$ and Intel need each other. If M$ keeps adding bloat, Intel can keep selling hotter processors. If Intel can keep Moore's Law going, there is hope for M$. M$ needs constantly faster hardware to run the bloat. Vista broke the mould by getting ahead of the curve/making idle loops too large to fit in the cache...

The netbook was a good shot by ASUS to break out of the Wintel monopoly. It helped to show millions GNU/Linux in action and encouraged other manufacturers to run with it. There has definitely been a push to drive up average selling prices to keep margins up. M$ needs that to hide the price of XP/Vista. The OEMs need that to give a decent return on investment. The netbook with ARM is allowing smaller OEMs to compete with the big guys. If ARM and other technologies succeed we will see the end of Wintel monopoly. M$ cannot buy everyone who can make netbooks.

It is all good.

Insist on choice. As long as we buy what Wintel supports the monopoly will persist.

Reply | Report this comment

Wintel Monopoly

Submitted by Dude on January 1, 2010 - 12:34 A.M.

Of course Intel is trying to squash Linux Netbooks. They are in a conspiracy with Microsoft. Look at the "Maximum System Requirements" imposed by both Intel and Microsoft: single core 1.6ghz or less processor, 1gb of RAM or less, 160gb hard drive or 16gb SSD drive and a 10.1 inch maximum screen size. I was an early adopter and was able to buy a Netbook with Ubuntu Linux with these specs. Well, except I have a 9 inch screen and an 8gb SSD drive. Linux runs quite well on this system.

Almost every Netbook has an Intel Atom processor. I've seen a few with 1.3ghz Via processors, but they are kind of pricey. MSI makes one now with an AMD processor. It comes with Windows Vista though. I would really love to buy a Netbook without an Intel processor or Windows. Why can't I find one? It's a conspiracy I tell you!

Reply | Report this comment

Wintel

Submitted by Kyle on April 28, 2009 - 1:23 P.M.

That's why my desktop at home is an AMD.

After doing the research, I understand that AMD simply have better processors.

Reply | Report this comment

Not sure if AMD is better, but...

Submitted by ricegf on April 30, 2009 - 5:25 P.M.

I'm not certain whether AMD processors are *better* than Intel's. I really can't tell the difference.

I use AMD for a very pragmatic and selfish reason - I HATE monopolies, so I vote with my dollars against Intel on processors and against Microsoft on operating systems and office suites.

Thank you AMD, Linux and OpenOffice.org for making that possible. Good luck!

Reply | Report this comment

AMD vs. Intel

Submitted by Josh Clayton on April 29, 2009 - 7:29 P.M.

...and

AMD is now in bed with Microsoft even more (if possible) than Intel. Unlike Intel, who have the market strength to both support Windows, and publicly promote the linux netbook, AMD has no winning strategy outside of Microsoft. The "Linux is an underdog and so is AMD" thing is the main thing going for AMD these days. Not to knock AMD. I am writing this on a Phenom system running Gentoo Linux.

Reply | Report this comment

Intel/AMD "better"

Submitted by MikeRamsey on April 29, 2009 - 10:43 A.M.

As much as I appreciate any statements that AMD is "better" than Intel (because I own a bunch of AMD stock), as an end user of both companies' processors, I honestly can't tell the difference.

Like most others, I do recognize the value of having two or more serious contenders, and that we are all better off as consumers of their products if AMD doesn't get trashed by Intel.

My IRA will be happier, too.

Reply | Report this comment

AMD for sure

Submitted by z80man on April 28, 2009 - 1:53 P.M.

I'm with you - I have been building (and occasionally buying) machines for many years, and have used exclusively AMD. I am very interested in the ARM netbooks, though, because I suspect they will run rings around Wintel ones. Haven't seen an AMD netbook yet, but I understand they are working on it. BTW, my primary computer is an AMD X2 with 2GB running Ubuntu.

Reply | Report this comment

"simply have better processors"

Submitted by Nate Bird on April 28, 2009 - 1:52 P.M.

Hmm. "simply have better processors" is quite the generalization. Basically they try to leapfrog each other and AMD did really good a couple years ago but Intel's Core lines have trashed AMD for the last few years. Personally I like there to be lots of competition (the Economics degree in me) but the reality is I choose my computer based on the OS and lets just say that Linux/Ubuntu and Windows don't meet my expectations.

Reply | Report this comment